The Economist has an interesting review of a book by Michael Rose, the former British General called "Washington's War: From Independence to Iraq".

Essentially he is arguing that George III and George Bush both have the same kinds of flaws that led them to failure in America's War of Independence and fighting the insurgency in Iraq.

"Like King George and his advisers, Mr Bush and his lieutenants misunderstood the nature of the problem facing them in Iraq and underestimated its scale. Both imperial Britain and modern America failed to commit enough troops early on. Nor could they resolve the dilemmas of counter-insurgency: how to wage military action without alienating the local population; and how to isolate the insurgents.

He compares Britain's former mastery of the seas with America's mastery of the air and George Washington's harrying tactics with ambushes of American supply convoys in Iraq. He also finds similarities between Washington's loss of New York in 1776 and Saddam Hussein's loss of Baghdad. He casts Iran in France's 18th-century role as the vital ally of the insurgents. "

A thought provoking thesis, and certainly one that bares closing investigation. However, I won't be reading the book, as the Economist review is less than complementary. However, it is a thought that I might turn to in the future.

Follow up : I see Michael Rose is also plugging his book on Start the Week on 30th April - Have a look here .